How well does the movie "Nowhere Boy" tell the story of the early days of John Lennon? Do you think it's accurate?
On the latest episode of the Fab Fourum, now available for download at www.podarama.com/fab_fourum, www.fabfourum.com/audio-gallery.html and on iTunes, co-hosts Tony Traguardo, Mitch Axelrod, Ken Michaels and Rob Leonard review and analyze the film.
The movie stars Aaron Johnson as John Lennon, Anne-Marie Duff as his mother Julia and Kristin Scott Thomas as his Aunt Mimi.
Comments
This is a wonderful film i think it portrays John's early life as well as any biopic can,this is in my top 5 of Beatles or Solo films of this nature.
Personally, I didn't like the movie at all. I thought the acting was sub-par and they screwed up so many facts, it was ridiculous...
I loved the movie because I love John Lennon and I am a hardcore Beatles fan, therefore I love everything Beatles-related which is serious and well done.
I think this is just a fiction, though. We can never know what really happened, but anyone can have an approximate idea based on all the books, stories, interviews, etc.
There are some inaccuracies in the movie (i.e., John liaised again with Julia when he was 11), but they are not important, as this is just a movie, right? The movie is emotionally acurate, and that's its great achevement. It manages to suggest John's turmoil, pain and feelings.
I think John and Aunt Mimi are quite truthful, whereas Julia is a bit too artificial, exalted and theatrical. The actress and the director exaggerated, really. Julia is not a character but rather a caricature or a cartoon. A huge miss, unfortunately.
The music scenes are fantastic: realistic and (therefore) gorgeous. That's a hit, a real one.
Ir was what it was.The thing that made me fell that it was cheese was the scene where the John character sings "In Spite Of All The Danger".
That was embarrassing because I cannot imagine Lennon acting that way during a song.It was weird and weak in a gay kind of way.All the Beatles re-enactment movies portray them as one dimensional.I prefer they show the characteristics with more depth.Lennon was funny,crass.intelligent.thoughtful.sarcastic,moody,pissy,warm,etc.
I never see these in the films.
I THOUGHT IT WAS REALLY WELL DONE. I'M JUST NOW READING JOHN'S BIO BY PHILIP NORMAN, AND IT SEEMS PRETTY CLOSE EMOTIONALLY. I WOULD RECOMMEND FOR THE FAN, LESS FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE STORY GOING INTO THE ART COLLEGE AND STU, ETC.
I thought it was ok, but not fantastic. I thought Johnson was better at John than Duff and Scott were in their roles. I liked the Liverpool scenery, but thought the picture of John as a child gave it a stamp of approval it shouldn't have had. It was fiction, after all.
Steve - How is it you know it was fiction? I'm serious, based on what - some other source you CHOOSE to believe is fact? I assume you didn't grow up with John and didn't have sleep overs at Aunt Mimi's, yet you KNOW what is true and what is not. I suspect it wasn't 100% fact in the film as I believe ALL of the books are also not 100% true. The Authors of Beatles books and Film makers have common, ground, they are both trying to sell a product. Any author must depend on accurate information from those who were there and in some cases claim to have been there. There's an amusing part of the Anthology where all of the participants (The Beatles) remember Shea Stadium DIFFERENTLY. And they were ALL THERE. That's my point which one is telling the truth? Just because it's in a book, doesn't make it true. Albert Goldman anyone?
It's a drama written by a script writer. Though it's based on a book by a family member, that family member has since criticized it.
And listen to the podcast and see what you think.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!